On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 6:10 AM, SZEDER Gábor <szeder@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 05:45:06AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 09:51:07AM +0200, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
>> >
>> >> > I wonder if we should have a:
>> >> >
>> >> > test_cmp_args () {
>> >> > echo "$1" >expect &&
>> >> > echo "$1" >actual &&
>> >> > test_cmp expect actual
>> >> > }
>> >> >
>> >> > to let these remain one-liners like:
>> >> >
>> >> > test_cmp_args "$(git rev-parse start)" "$(git rev-parse final^1^1^1)"
>> >>
>> >> This idea come up before, but there is one flaw which makes this
>> >> function less useful: a non-zero exit code of the commands in the
>> >> command substitutions would be lost.
>> >
>> > Good point. You'd probably have to do something gross with eval, like:
>> >
>> > test_cmp_args () {
>> > eval "$1" >expect &&
>> > eval "$2" >actual &&
>>
>> I don't see any reason to perpetuate these yoda comparisons.
>>
>> eval "$2" >expect &&
>> eval "$1" >actual &&
>
> I do. Your proposal requires the arguments in the reverse order
> compared to test_cmp. That inconsistency would be far worse than
> test_cmp_args "$expect" "$actual".
There are two ways to fix an inconsistency, the other way is to fix
test_cmp. But that would be a change, and change is not welcome in
Git.
For this reason alone I would prefer 'test "$actual" = expected', than
the yodaish 'test_cmp_args "expected" "$actual"'.
--
Felipe Contreras
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html